http://www.spring-nutrition.org/nglee-africa

Gender sensitive programming for nutritional impact

December 10, 2012

Agriculture and Nutrition Global Learning and Evidence Exchange (N-GLEE) Kampala, Uganda

Amber Peterman, Jeannie Harvey and Pamela Kampire

Overview of presentation

Review why gender is important in leveraging agriculture for nutrition and articulate pathways through which gender modifies the relationship between agriculture and nutrition.

Presentation of case studies within the USAID Africa Feed the Future portfolio where gender has been successfully leveraged (or alternatively where lack of attention to gender inhibited successful implementation) within agriculture programs for nutrition impact:

1. Community Connector Program (Uganda) 2. Honey Value Chain

Assessment and evaluation tools available to measure gender inputs and impacts in agriculture and nutrition linkage projects.

2

Part I: Why gender?

Agriculture is highly “gendered” in developing economies (SOFA 2011):

Women make up a large percentage of the agricultural labor force in developing countries (on average 43%, 50% in Africa);

Women are disadvantaged in productive asset ownership (including land and livestock), control of productive inputs (including access to credit, insurance, technology etc.);

Gender differences in base education levels, access to services (extension), natural resource knowledge;

Female farmers produce less than men not because they are less efficient/able farmers, but because they lack equal access to resources.

3

      

      

      

      

       

Snapshot: Access to agricultural inputs

15

5 5 4

23

9 8

technology related to input use, access,

adoption

access to water and soil management

techniques

access to ag extension and ag

labour

access to social capital and political

capital

Men favoured Women favoued No statistical difference

Number of studies reviewed

Source: Peterman, Behrman and Quisumbing, 2010. IFPRI Discussion Paper 975 (SOFA background paper)

4

By closing the gender-resource gap:

Productivity boost: Women could increase productivity on their farms by 20-30% This would raise total output at national level by 2.5-4%

Productivity gains of this magnitude have potential to: Reduce in the number of hungry people in the world by 12-17% Lift 100-150 million people out of hunger

Multiplier effects on broader economic and social realms: Women, relative to men, spend more on food for the family. Women’s incomes are more strongly associated with child health

and nutrition.

Info graphic from FAO: http://www.fao.org/gender/infographic/en/

5

Reviewing the “7 key pathways”

Pathway 1: Own production food consumption

Pathway 2: Income food purchase

Pathway 3: Income healthcare purchase

Pathway 4: Food prices food purchase

Pathway 5: Women’s time use care capacity

Pathway 6: Women’s workload maternal energy use

Pathway 7: Women’s control of income resource allocation

6

Key points

Of seven key pathways, three are specifically women-focused, but ALL are gendered;

Gender has been identified as the “key element” in the linkage between agriculture and nutrition;

You cannot successfully and effectively link agriculture and nutrition without accounting for gender issues.

7

Case Study 1: Community Connector

Programmatic Context: Realities and Challenges from Uganda

Goal: Improve nutrition and food security through integrated nutrition and agriculture interventions.

Nutrition and health BCC, agricultural extension and savings promotion through pre-existing groups.

5 year project in 15 districts in northern and southern Uganda.

Started Jan 2012.

8

What we have learned through implementation:

Training and periodic sensitization

Equipment and tools used

Recruitment of staff/community based trainers

Support in the field against abuse related to gender

Senior management’s belief

9

Challenges

• Most poor women (especially younger ones) do not join groups

• High levels of illiteracy among women high school drop out

teenage pregnancies

forced marriages

• Few opportunities for women from poorer families to earn income

• Strong cultural beliefs that define gender roles –including increasing gender-based violence, alcoholism, and position of men

10

Is Gender seriously part of analysis and planning?

In-depth analysis (not just disaggregating the data).

Community Connector included gender in the situation analysis BUT in-depth assessments and analysis are ongoing.

Now serious inclusion (leadership needed for enforcement not just the “Gender Expert”).

11

Health

Food

New Implementation Model

12

The family cohesion is key in meeting households’ aspirations: Family Life Model

Health

Food

WealthFamily

cohesion and dynamics in

the family and community

Decisions and control of resources: women want to involve men!

Even women’s groups can insist on involvement, leadership or support of men.

How do we best engage and involve men to help reduce women’s work loads?

13

Strategies for addressing gender in nutrition programming

Gender considerations in choice of foods used to prepare meals in households during busy periods

14

15

Inclusive Agriculture Sector Growth

The value chain approach

The whole picture

• The local legal and policy environments

• Access to and information about markets

• Local capacity and support

Gender-sensitive value chains

Case Study 2: Value Chains

“Add women and stir” to the value chain

16

Characteristics of Gender Equitable Value Chain Programs

Value chain programs that support gender equity goals:

Understand men’s and women’s roles and relations

Foster equitable participation

Address the needs of women

Support women’s economic advancement

Promote gender equitable market-driven solutions

Design equitable benefit-sharing mechanisms

Include men (in addition to women) in defining the

“problem” and the solution

17

Gender-equitable Value Chains

18

Guide to Integrating Gender into Agricultural Value Chains

Phase 1 – Map gender relations and roles along the value chain

Phase 2 – Identify gender-based constraints

Phase 3 – Assess the consequences of gender-based constraints

Phase 4 – Act to remove gender-based constraints

Phase 5 – Measure success

19

Honey Value Chain

20

Exercise

• What questions would you ask to gain a better understanding of how to focus the project in order to support gender integration?

21

22

Gender-sensitive Honey Value Chain

Part III: Gender assessment

What is “gender assessment?”

Including information on women AND men [girls AND boys] and their relationship to each other in:

Scoping and formative studies

Monitoring data

Cross sectional assessments

Longitudinal impact evaluations

Qualitative studies

Reporting

23

Some generalizations

Inputs and outcomes must be measured at the individual level;

Entails significant costs : Monetary, time and logistical costs (e.g. may need to employ female enumerators, women may be less likely to be at home if they need to be interviewed);

Complex – there are no set of “one size fits all” gender indicators, as relationships are often determined by cultural norms, and important to measure both objective and subjective indicators;

No set of standardized indicators or methods for gender-agriculture­nutrition assessment, however some progress has been made!

24

Gender in the Agriculture-Nutrition nexus

Documenting gender program effects is key to understanding how, why and what impact programs have:

Gender in Nutrition Research: Well established, standardized measurements, most nutrition outcomes focus on individual indicators already.

Gender in Agriculture Research: Less well established, still focus on men, at the household level or very basic indicators such as “counting bodies” – however lots of progress (ongoing) and in the last 5 years.

25

PBS Standardized Nutrition Indicators

• Household Hunger Scale: See T. Ballard, J. Coates, A. Swindale, M. Deitchler. 2011. Household Hunger Scale: Indicator Definition and Measurement Guide.

• Women’s Dietary Diversity: The applicable disaggregated food groups in Module L of the FTF PBS should be aggregated into the nine food groups specified in Volume 8 of the M&E Guidance Series and the number of food groups consumed summed.

• Exclusive Breastfeeding and Minimum Acceptable Diet: See WHO, 2010. Indicators for assessing infant and young child feeding practices: Part II Measurement.

• Underweight, Stunted, Wasted Children: See B. Cogill, 2003 Anthropometric Indicators Measurement Guide. Be sure to use the WHO Child Growth Standards.

• Underweight Women: Underweight in non-pregnant women of reproductive age (15-49 years) is defined by a body mass index (BMI) < 18.5. BMI is calculated as weight (in kg) ÷ height (in meters).

• Anemia: See: ICF/Macro. 2011 DHS6_Biomarker_Manual and Infant Feeding and Children's and Women'sNutritional Status.

26

EX 1: Integrated Surveys on Agriculture (1)

World Bank and country partners with funding from BMGF developed Living Standards Measurement Survey Integrated Surveys on Agriculture (LSMS-ISA).

Build on nationally representative panels, large-scale, in 8 countries: Ethiopia, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda.

Use Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) and pilot innovative ways of collecting indicators.

Household, Agriculture, Community level surveys.

Multiple visits per year, ability to link to SES and other economic indicators.

Information, sourcebooks and data publicly available through the WB website: here.

27

EX 1: Integrated Surveys on Agriculture (2)

Most comprehensive, comparable statistics on gender-differences in agricultural inputs, productivity, farm related labor:

Basic crop production; Productivity of main crops; Land holdings; Farming practices; Input use and technology

adoption; Access to and use of services,

infrastructure and natural resources;

Livestock; Fishery.

28

Harvesting in Nigeria, Credit: Yosef Hadar

29

EX 1: Integrated Surveys on Agriculture (3)

How is gender-disaggregation captured?

• Plot level using IDs • Labor inputs, decision making, land,

crop ownership etc.

EX 2: The Gender and Agricultural Assets Project (GAAP)

Joint initiative between the IFPRI and the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) and 9 implementing partners funded by the BMGF.

Evaluate the impact of agricultural development activities on women’s and men’s access to and control over key assets using quantitative and qualitative approaches.

Clarify which strategies have been successful in reducing gender gaps in asset access and ownership.

Develop and share methods of collecting and analyzing gender­disaggregated asset information to put gender considerations at the center of assessment efforts.

30

Not all assessments are quantitative!

Women’s land titling evaluation in Orissa and WB India, Landesa

• Focus group discussions • Asset ownership, food security,

bargaining power games

• Life histories

31

Mirco-irrigation treadle pumps in Kenya and Tanzania, KickStart

Participatory Impact Diagrams (PID) from sex disaggregated FGDs

32

GAAP Toolkit (a work in progress)

http://gaap.ifpri.info/files/2010/12/GAAP_Toolkit_Feb_14.pdf

The toolkit seeks to answer “the why, what and how to collect, measure, and analyze gender and assets data in qualitative and quantitative evaluations.”

Includes an appendix of “Cases” on the use of gender-disaggregated assets modules being developed:

World Bank: rural land certification in Ethiopia; FAO’s Agri-Gender Statistic Toolkit; USAID Handbook for Promoting Gender Equitable Opportunities in

Agricultural Value Chains, Greater Access to Trade Expansion (GATE) Project;

Gender Assessment: Initiative to End Hunger in Africa (IEHA) ; SIDA: Gender Aware Approaches in Agricultural Programmes ‘In Her Name’ project: Measuring the gender asset gap in Ecuador, Ghana

and India.

33

EX 3: WEAI

Piloting and developing the Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI)

• Partnership between IFPRI, the Oxford Poverty and Hunger Initiative (OPHI) and USAID.

• Design, develop, and test an index to measure the greater inclusion of women in agricultural sector growth that has occurred as a result of US Government intervention under the FTF Initiative

• “Greater inclusion” is defined as “the empowerment of women in their roles and engagement throughout the various areas of the agriculture sector, as it grows, in both quantity and quality.”

34

What is new about the WEAI?

An aggregate index in two parts:

Five domains of empowerment (5DE): assesses whether women are empowered in the 5 domains of empowerment in agriculture

Gender Parity Index (GPI): reflects the percentage of women who are as empowered as the men in their households

It is a survey-based index, constructed using interviews of the primary male and primary female adults in the same household, piloted in Bangladesh, Guatemala and Uganda.

35

WEAI: 5 domains, 10 indicators

An individual is considered to be ‘empowered’ if he/she achieves adequacy in 80% of the weighted indicators

36

Ex: Input in Productive Decisions (1 of 2)

MODULE G2: ROLE IN HOUSEHOLD DECISION-MAKING AROUND PRODUCTION AND INCOME GENERATION -- page 2

37

Ex: Input in Productive Decisions (2 of 2)

Scoring criteria:

• Aggregation Method: Respondent must have achievement in two (must be above the threshold for two questions)

• Inadequacy cut-off: Inadequate if 1) individual participates BUT does not have at least some input in decisions or 2) does not make the decisions nor feels s/he could to at least a medium extent

38

Ex: Workload (1 of 2)

MODULE G6: TIME ALLOCATION -- page 9 to 10

A B C D E F G J K L M N P Q T U W X

Night Morning Day

Activ ity 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Sleeping and resting

Eating and drinking

Personal care

School (also homework)

Work as employ ed

Own business work

Farming/livestock/fishing

Shopping/getting serv ice (incl health serv ices)

Weaving, sewing, textile care

Cooking

Domestic work (incl fetching wood and water)

C are for children/adults/elderly

Trav elling and communiting

Watching TV/listening to radio/reading

Exercising

Social activ ities and hobbies

Religious activ ities

Other, specify …

The total time spent includes primary and secondary activities: Total workload = sum of primary + 0.5(sum of secondary)

39

Ex: Workload (2 of 2)

Scoring criteria:

• Aggregation Method: NA

• Inadequacy cut-off: Inadequate if worked more than 10.5 hours in the previous day.

40

Uganda: How to increase empowerment?

Results: 37.3% women empowered, 54.4% have gender parity Disempowered women have adequate achievements in 64.4% of domains

41

The WEAI can be used to:

• Track changes over time in: – Percentage of empowered men/women – Absolute empowerment score among the disempowered

• Show how to increase women’s empowerment • Monitor progress toward gender equality • Correlate empowerment and gender equality with

other measures including: – Household consumption, food security, welfare – Nutrition indicators – Socio-economic status including education

42

Gender Assessment “checklist”

Pre-assessment, chart pathways and how gender interacts with intervention components;

Who is being interviewed – who is doing the interviewing [Yes, it matters!]?

How is a household defined? Measure both input, output and process indicators at an

individual level, as well as household level; Start with examples and commonly used indicators and

modify based on cultural context. When in doubt, ask! Incorporate qualitative components to

inform the “why” and “how.”

43

Gender “best practices”?

44

Additional Resources

A Guide to Integrating Gender into Agricultural Value Chains (2010). [Based on Promoting Gender Equitable Opportunities in Agricultural Value Chains: A Handbook]. USAID. Published by LLC Cultural Practices. http://transition.usaid.gov/our_work/cross­cutting_programs/wid/pubs/Gender_Agriculture_Value_Chain_Guide.pdf

Gender: A Key Dimension linking Agricultural Programs to Improved Nutrition and Health (2011). 2020 Conference Brief 9: Meinzen-Dick, Behrman, Menon and Quisumbing. http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/2020anhconfbr09.pdf

Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index (2012). Summary brochure, USAID, IFPRI and Oxford: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/weai_brochure.pdf

Food and Agriculture Organization (2010-11): State of Food and Agriculture 2011: Women in Agriculture, Closing the Gender Gap for Development: http://www.fao.org/publications/sofa2010­11/en/

45

Thank you!

Amber Peterman, Research Fellow

Poverty, Health and Nutrition Division, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) Email: a.peterman@cgiar.org

Jeannie Harvey, Gender Advisor USAID Bureau for Food Security (BFS) Email: marharvey@usaid.gov

Pamela Kampire, Senior Gender Advisor Community Connector - Kampala, Uganda

Email: pkampire@Fhi360.org

46